POLITICS  AND  THE  SCHOOL  QUESTION. 


Attitude  of*  tlie  Democratic  and 
Republican  Parties. 


“  Our 

you  to  rally 


Common  Schools  are  in  danger  ;  we  call  upon 
in  their  defense.” — Union  League  of  America. 


THE  REPUBLICAN  PARTY. 

♦ 

The  position  of  the  two  great  political  parties  on  the  public  school 
question  is  clearly  and  unmistakably  defined.  As  soon  as  the  question  as¬ 
sumed  a  serious  aspect,  the  Republican  party  “advanced  to  the  front,”  and, 
without  hesitation,  became  the  champion  of  the  public  schools,  boldly  meet¬ 
ing  the  question  officially  in  her  State  and  National  Conventions.  A  few 
illustrations  will  suffice  to  show  the  attitude  of  the  Republican  party  on  this 
question. 

THE  PUBLIC  SCHOOLS  SUSTAINED  BY  REPUBLICAN 

STATESMEN. 

President  Grant,  in  his  speech  to  the  army  of  the  Tennessee,  said : 

<;Tlie  free  school  is  the  promoter  of  that  intelligence  which  is  to  preserve  us  as  a 
free  nation.  *  *  *  *  Let  us  encourage  free  schools,  and  resolve  that  not  one  dollar 
appropriated  for  their  support  shall  be  appropriated  to  the  support  of  any  sectarian 
schools.” 

In  harmony  with  these  views,  the  President,  in  his  Message  to  Congress, 
recommended : 

“That  a  constitutional  amendment  be  submitted  to  the  Legislatures  of  the  several 
States  for  ratification,  making  it  the  duty  of  each  of  the  several  States  to  establish 'and 
forever  maintain  free  public  schools  adequate  to  the  education  of  all  the  children  in  the 
rudimentary  branches,  within  their  respective  limits,  irrespective  of  sex,  -color,  birth¬ 
place,  or  religion,  forbidding  the  teaching  in  said  schools  of  religious,  atheistic, -or 
pagan  tenets,  and  prohibiting  the  granting  of  any  school-funds  or  school-taxes,  or  anv 
part  thereof,  either  by  legislative,  municipal,  or  other  authority,  for  the  benefit  or  in 
aid,  directly  or  indirectly,  of  any  religious  sect  or  denomination,  or  in  aid  or  for  the 
benefit  of  any  other  object  of  any  nature  or  kind  whatever.” 


4 


Hon.  James  G.  Blaine,  in  a  letter,  dated  October  20,  1875,  to  a  gentle¬ 
man  in  Ohio,  writes : 

“  It  seems  to  me  that  thi3  (school)  question  ought  to  be  settled  in  some  definite 
and  comprehensive  way,  and  the  only  settlement  that  can  be  final  is  the  complete 
victory  for  non-sectarian  schools.  I  am  sure  this  will  be  demanded  by  the  American 
people  at  all  hazards  and  at  any  cost.” 

In  order  to  secure  this  settlement,  Mr.  Blaine  submitted  to  Congress 
his  proposed  constitutional  (school)  amendment. 

Attorney-General  Taft,  the  late  Secretary  of  War,  in  a  speech  at 
Cleveland,  Ohio,  during  the  late  campaign  in  that  State,  thus  alluded  to  the 
aggressive  movements  of  the  Roman  Catholics : 

“The  Catholic  clergy  are  attempting  an  impossibility.  They  have  faith  in  the 
divinity  of  their  church  ;  but  they  will  have  to  learn  in  America  that  there  is  a  divinity 
imtlie  Republic  as  impregnable  and  more  potent  than  that  which  any  church  organ¬ 
ization  can  bring  against  it.  ******  In  my  judgment,  all  attempts  to  se¬ 
cure  the  division  of  the  school  fund,  or  the  introduction  of  religious  teaching  into  the 
schools,  in  the  interest  of  any  church,  are  vain  and  injurious,  and  ought  to  be  aban¬ 
doned.” 

At  the  Hayes  and  Wheeler  ratification  meeting,  at  Washington  City, 
June  19,  187G,  Judge  Taft  again  alluded  to  the  school  question  in  the  fol¬ 
lowing  terms : 

“  Popular  education  is  the  hope  of  the  Republic.  I  trust  that  the  time  is  not  far 
distant  when  all  the  people  will  acquiesce  in  sustaining  the  common  schools,  and  when 
they  who  would  ask  a  division  of  the  school  fund  will  yield  to  the  geniu3  of  Republic¬ 
anism,  and  be  satisfied  to  give  religious  instruction  and  enjoy  religious  worship  in  the 
family  and  in  the  church,  while  the  State,  with  a  sovereign  impartiality,  shall  perform 
'  its  great  duty  of  making  education  universal  through  the  best  system  of  common 
schools  the  world  ever  saw.” 

Ex-Governor  Noyes,  of  Ohio,  after  participating  in  the  campaign 
in  Ohio,  which  resulted  in  the  election  of  Governor  Hayes,  made  an  ad¬ 
dress  in  the  Academy  of  Music,  in  Brooklyn,  Oct.  30,  1875,  in  which 
he  strongly  protested  against  the  Roman  Catholic  crusade  against  our 
schools.  In  the  course  of  his  remarks  on  this  subject  he  said : 

“  I  recognize  the  right  of  the  Roman  Catholics  to  carry  on  their  church  govern¬ 
ment  the  same  as  any  other,  as  long  as  they  confine  themselves  to  the  spiritual 
domain,  but  when  they  step  out  of  that  and  undertake  to  dictate  the  laws  of  this  land, 
and  interfere  with  their  enforcement,  then  we  say,  you  are  trespassers  from  your 
domain,  and  you  must  retire  to  your  place. 

“  To-day  the  Catholics  number  one  to  six  in  our  population.  They  are  a  great 
political  power,  and  unless  we  stop  their  interference  with  our  schools  at  the  very 
threshold,  then  is  the  future  of  these  schools  in  danger.” 

General  R.  B.  Hayes  said,  in  the  Ohio  campaign,  in  the  same  year : 

“  Our  motto  is  honest  money  for  all,  and  free  schools  for  all.  There  should  be  no 
inflation  which  will  destroy  the  one,  and  no  sectarian  influence  which  will  destroy  the 
other.  ” 


Iii  a  speech  delivered  at  Marion,  Lawrence  Co.,  Ohio,  July  31,  1875, 
General  Hayes  said : 

“  Every  body  knows  that  the  sectarian  wing  of  the  Democratic  party  begun  this 
agitation,  and  that  it  i3  bent  on  the  destruction  of  our  free  schools.  *  *  *  No 
Democratic  speaker  denounces  those  who  began  the  agitation.  All  their  epithets  are 
levelled  at  the  men  who  are  on  the  right  side  of  the  question.  *  *  *  Tne  sectarian 
agitation  against  the  schools  was  begun  many  years  ago.  During  the  last  few  years 
it  has  steadily  and  rapidly  increased,  and  has  been  encouraged  by  various  indications 
of  possible  success.  Its  triumphs  are  mainly  in  large  towns  and  cities.  It  ha3  already 
divided  the  schools,  and  in  a  considerable  degree  impaired  and  limited  their  useful¬ 
ness.  The  glory  of  the  American  system  of  education  has  been  that  it  was  so  cheap 
that  the  humblest  citizen  could  afford  to  give  his  children  its  advantages,  and  so  good, 
that  the  man  of  wealth  could  nowhere  provide  for  his  children  any  thing  better.” 


ACTION  OF  REPUBLICAN  STATE  CONVENTIONS. 

PENNSYLVANIA . 

From  the  platform  adopted  at  Harrisburg,  March  29,  1876  : 

“  Resolved ,  That  the  common  safety  demands  that  our  public  schools  shall  not  only 
be  free  to  all,  but  shall  be  preserved  from  all  special  or  partial  control.  All  attempts 
to  divide  the  school  fund  for  any  purpose  whatever,  or  to  divert  any  portion  of  it  into  a 
channel  not  under  popular  control,  is  to  be  frowned  upon  and  resisted  with  unyielding 
firmness.  The  recent  defeat  in  the  Democratic  Legislature  of  Maryland  of  a  constitu¬ 
tional  amendment  to  secure  the  common  school  fund  of  that  State  against  division  re¬ 
veals  at  once  a  grave  danger,  and  its  source,  and  with  other  like  facts  makes  plain  the 
duty  of  Congress  to  submit  such  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  as,  when  adopted,  will  effectually  defend  the  common  school  system  from  all 
enemies,  open  or  covert.” 

VERMONT. 

From  the  platform  adopted  at  Burlington,  March  29,  1876  : 

“  Third:  The  safety  of  the  Republic  depends  upon  the  intelligence  as  well  as  the 
virtue  of  its  citizens,  and  it  is  essential  that  the  public  school  system  shall  be 
maintained,  in  order  that  every  child  may  receive  such  education  as  will  fit  him  for 
useful  citizenship,  and  we  are  unalterably  opposed  to  any  diversion  of  public  money  for 
any  purpose  whatever.” 

OHIO. 

From  the  platform  adopted  at  Columbus,  March  29,  1876  : 

“  Seventh :  We  stand  by  our  system  of  free  common  schools,  supported  by  general 
taxation.  There  must  be  no  division  of  the  school  fund,  and  no  sectarian  interference 
with  the  schools.’* 

IOWA. 

The  platform  adopted  at  Des  Moines,  May  31,  1876,  “supports  free 
education  and  the  public  school  system,  and  no  division  of  the  school  fund.” 

CONNECTICUT. 

From  the  platform  of  the  late  State  Convention  : 

“We  speak  for  the  encouragement  and  support  of  education.  The  safety  of  the  Re¬ 
public  depends  upon  the  intelligence  as  well  as  the  virtue  of  its  citizens,  in  order  that 


the  unity  of  the  nation,  preserved  at  the  coat  of  war,  may  be  maintained  in  peace.  It  is 
essential  that  the  State  schools  shall  continue  to  be  common  schools,  where  every  child 
in  the  State  may  receive  such  education  as  will  fit  him  to  be  useful  in  the  community,, 
happy  in  his  home,  and  absolutely  removed  from  that  ignorance  which  is  the  mother  of 
crime ;  and  we  are  unalterably  opposed  to  any  diversion  of  the  public  school  money  for 
any  purpose  whatever.” 

NEW  YORK. 

The  Republican  Convention  at  Saratoga,  September  8,  1875,  adopted 
the  following : 

“The  free  public  school  is  the  bulwark  of  the  American  Republic.  We,  therefore, 
demand  the  unqualified  maintenance  of  the  public  school  system  and  its  support  by 
equal  taxation.  We  are  opposed  to  all  sectarian  appropriations,  and  we  denounce  as  a 
crime  against  liberty  and  Republican  institutions  any  project  for  a  sectarian  division 
or  perversion  of  the  school  fund  of  the  State.” 

In  the  call  for  a  State  Convention  to  assemble  at  Syracuse,  March  22, 
1876,  for  the  purpose  of  electing  delegates  to  the  National  (Cincinnati)  Con¬ 
vention,  and  signed  by  Alonzo  B.  Cornell,  as  Chairman  of  the  State  Com¬ 
mittee,  those  are  invited  to  participate,  “  who  hold  that  the  common  school 
system  is  the  nursery  of  American  Liberty,  and  should  be  maintained  abso¬ 
lutely  free  from  sectarian  control.” 

The  State  Convention  at  Saratoga,  Aug.  23,  1876,  unanimously  adopted 
the  following  as  one  of  the  resolutions  of  its  platform: 

“  Sixth. — The  Democratic  party,  in  its  controlling  spirit,  is  false  and  untrustworthy 
on  every  living  issue  ;  false  in  practical  government,  for  its  eight  months  of  power  in 
Congress  are  barren  of  good  fruits  ;  false  to  equal  rights  and  the  new  guarantees  of  the 
Constitution ;  false  on  the  currency,  for  it  openly  repudiates  the  resumption  pledge  ; 
FALSE  ON  THE  QUESTION  OF  THE  SAFETY  OF  THE  SCHOOLS,  FOE  THE  SOLID  DEMOCRATIC 
VOTE  IN  THE  UNITED  STATE3  SENATE  DEFEATED  AN  ADEQUATE  AMENDMENT  TO  PRO¬ 
TECT  THE  SCHOOL  SYSTEM  FROM  SECTARIAN  ATTACK.” 

Hon.  John  M.  Francis,  on  assuming  the  Presidency  of  this  Conven¬ 
tion,  said : 

“  The  lines  to-day  are  as  sharply  drawn  as  they  were  in  1861.  On  the  one  side 
we  have  arranged  the  loyal  and  true  men  of  the  nation,  under  a  leader  who  bas  dis¬ 
tinguished  himself  in  the  defence  of  the  government,  and  who  periled  his  life  and  shed 
his  blood  that  it  might  endure.  These  loyal  and  true  men,  and  this  gallant  leader, 
staod  upon  a  platform  that  sustains  the  Union  in  its  integrity,  guarantees  the  public 
faith,  protects  the  just  rights  of  citizens  in  all  parts  of  the  land,  and  promises  Con¬ 
stitutional  SECURITY  TO  THE  COMMON  SCHOOLS  AGAINST  ALL  SECTARIAN  INTERFERENCE 
OR  ASSAULT.” 

Hon.  Geo.  W.  Curtis  eloquently  said: 

“  Our  cause  is  the  cause  of  freedom  in  its  largest  sense.  The  cause  in  the  old 
time  of  free  speech  and  free  men  is  no  less  now  the  cause  of  free  schools  and  free 
voters.” 

PROPOSED  CONSTITUTIONAL  AMENDMENT. 

Tie  New  York  Legislature  of  1875-76,  which  had  a  Republican  majority 
in  either  house,  passed  the  following  proposed  amendment  to  the  State  Con¬ 
stitution,  which  is  yet  to  be  submitted  to  a  vote  of  the  people  : 


7 


v 


“Section  2.  Free  common  schools  shall  be  maintained  throughout  the  State 
forever.  The  Legislature  shall  provide  for  the  instruction  in  the  branches  of  elementary 
education,  in  such  schools,  of  all  persons  in  the  State,  between  the  ages  of  five  and 
twenty-one  years,  for  the  period  of  at  least  twenty-eight  weeks  in  each  year. 

“  §  3.  Neither  the  money,  property  or  credit  of  the  State,  nor  of  any  county,  city, 
town,  village  or  school  district,  shall  be  given,  loaned  or  leased,  or  be  otherwise  applied, 
to  the  support  or  aid  of  any  school  of  instruction  under  the  control  or  in  charge  of  any 
church,  sect,  denomination,  or  religious  society ;  nor  to  or  in  aid  of  any  school  in  which 
instruction  is  given  peculiar  to  any  church,  creed,  sect,  or  denomination,  or  to  or  in  aid 
of  any  such  instruction  ;  nor  to  or  in  aid  of  any  school  of  instruction  not  wholly  under 
the  control  and  supervision  and  in  charge  of  the  public  school  authorities.  This  sec¬ 
tion  shall  not  prohibit  the  Legislature  from  making  such  provision  for  the  education  of 
the  blind,  the  deaf  and  dumb,  and  juvenile  delinquents,  as  it  may  deem  proper,  except 
in  institutions  in  which  instruction  is  given  peculiar  to  any  church,  creed,  sect  or 
denomination,  or  religious  society.  Nor  shall  it  apply  to  or  affect  the  Cornell  Uni¬ 
versity  endowment  fund  hitherto  pledged  and  appropriated.” 

NEW  JERSEY. 

From  tlie  platform  adopted  by  the  New  Jersey  Republican.  State  Con¬ 
vention,  at  New  Brunswick,  Aug.  30,  1876 : 

“  Resolved  >  That  we  are  inflexibly  opposed,  to  any  and  all  attempts,  direct  or  indi¬ 
rect,  to  impair  the  efficiency  of  our  free  public  schools,  and  we  demand  that  they  be 
scrupulously  kept  forever  free,  by  the  adoption  of  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States,  from  all  ecclesiastical  or  sectarian  interference.” 


REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL  CONVENTION. 

The  following  resolution  was  adopted  by  the  late  Cincinnati  Presides 
tial  Convention,  June,  1876  : 

“  7.  The  public  school  system  of  the  several  States  is  the  bulwark  of  the  American 
Republic,  and  with  a  view  to  its  security  and.  permanence  we  recommend  an  amend¬ 
ment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  forbidding  the  application  of  any  public 
funds  or  property  for  the  benefit  of  any  school  or  institution  under  sectarian  control.” 

This  declaration  elicited  hearty  applause,  and  a  second  reading  was 
called  for,  when  it  was  received  amid  tumultuous  cheers. 

General  Hayes7  letter  accepting  the  nomination  as  a  candidate  for  Pre¬ 
sident,  thus  speaks  of  the  above  resolution : 

“The  resolution  with  respect  to  the  pahhc  school  system  is  one  which  should 
receive  the  hearty  support  of  the  American  people.  Agitation  upon  this  subject  is  to 
be  apprehended,  until,  by  conshtutiaiial  amendment,  the  schools  are  placed  beyond 
all  danger  of  sectarian  control  or  interference.  The'  Republican  party  is  pledged  to 
secure  such  an  amendment.” 

In  harmony  with  the  above,  we  have  the  following  in  Mr.  Wheeler's 
letter  of  acceptance: 

“  In  our  system  of  government  intelligence  must  give  safety  and  value  to  the 
ballot.  Hence  the  common  schools  of  the  land  should  be  preserved  in  all  their  vigor, 
while,  in  accordance  with  the  spirit  of  the  Cbustltution,  they  and  all  their  endowments 
should  be  secured  by  every  possible  and  proper  guarantee  against  every  form  of 
sectarian  influence  or  control.” 


8 


/ 

s 

THE  CONSTITUTIONAL  AMENDMENT. 

The  proposed  amendment  to  the  Constitution,  as  introduced  in  the 
House  of  Representatives  by  Mr.  Blaine,  was  amended  by  the  House,  and 
passed  by  a  vote  of  166  to  5 — the  five  votes  being  given  by  Democrats. 
After  its  passage  it  was  sent  to  the  Senate  for  concurrence,  where  it  was 
found  to  be  radically  defective,  inasmuch  as  it  simply  prohibited  a  State 
from  diverting  a  part  of  the  fund  set  apart  for  public  schools  to  the  sup¬ 
port  of  sectarian  schools  ;  but  did  not  prevent  the  State  from  levying  a 
special  tax  for  that  purpose,  so  that  under  this  amendment  a  State  could 
support  sectarian  schools  to  any  extent.  For  this  reason  the  Roman 
Catholic  members  and  their  Democratic  friends  had  no  objection  to  vote 
for  it,  and  therefore  they  passed  it. 

In  the  Senate  it  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary,  and 
was  finally  rejiorted  in  the  following  amended  form: 

“Resolved,  By  tlie  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  (two-thirds  of  each 
House  concurring  therein),  that  the  following  articles  be  proposed  to  the  Legisla¬ 
tures  of  the  several  States  as  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
which,  when  ratified  by  three-fourths  of  the  said  Legislatures,  shall  be  valid  as  a  part 
of  the  said  Constitution,  namely  : 

t:  Article  16.  No  State  shall  make  any  law  respecting  an  establishment  of  religion 
or  prohibiting  the  free  exercise  thereof,  and  no  religious  test  shall  be  required  as  a 
qualification  to  any  office  or  public  trust  under  any  State.  No  public  property^and  no 
public  revenue  of,  nor  any  loan  of  credit  by  or  under  the  authority  of  the  United 
States,  or  any  State  Territory,  district,  or  municipal  corporation,  shall  be  appropriated 
to  or  made  or  used  for  the  support  of  any  school,  educational,  or  other  institutions 
under  the  control  of  any  religious  or  anti-religious  sect,  organization,  or  denomination, 
or  wherein  the  particular  creeds  or  tenets  shall  be  read  or  taught  in  any  school  or  in¬ 
stitution  supported  in  whole  or  in  part  by  such  revenue  or  loan  of  credit,  and  no  such 
appropriation  or  loan  of  credit  shall  be  made  to  any  religious  or  anti-religious  sect, 
organization,  or  denomination,  or  to  promote  its  interests  or  tenets. 

“This  article  shall  not  be  construed  to  prohibit  the  reading  of  the  Bible  in  any 
school  or  institution,  and  it  shall  not  have  the  effect  to  impair  the  rights  of  property 
already  vested. 

“Section  2.  Congress  shall  have  power  by  appropriate  legislation  to  provide  for  the 
prevention  and  punishment  of  violations  of  this  article.” 

This  amendment  was  agreed  to  by  a  strict  party  vote,  every  Republican 
voting  for  it,  and  every  Democrat  against,  it. 

When  it  came  up  for  its  third  and  last  reading,  it  met  with  a  spirited 
opposition  from  the  Democratic  Senators,  the  leaders  of  the  opposition 
being  the  Roman  Catholics  members,  who  were  sustained  by  Protestant 
Democrats.  Senator  Kernan,  the  Roman  Catholic  Senator  from  New  York, 


9 


opened  the  debate  against  it,  declaring  himself  in  favor  of  the  House 
amendment.  Senator  Bogy,  another  Democratic  Roman  Catholic,  from 
Missouri,  also  opposed  it,  and  when  the  vote  was  taken  on  its  final  passage, 
it  was  defeated  by  a  strict  party  vote,  every  Democratic,  including  four 
Roman  Catholics,  voting  against  it.  The  vote  was  yeas  28,  nays  16.  A  two- 
thirds  vote  being  required  to  pass  it,  it  was  lost. 

The  vote  in  detail  was  as  follows: 

Yeas  —  Messrs.  Allison,  Anthony,  Booth,  Boutwell,  Bunce,  Burnside,  Cameron 
(Wis.),  Christiancy,  Clayton,  Conkling,  Cragin,  Edmunds,  Ferry,  Frelinghuysen, 
Harvey,  Jones  (Nev.),  Logan,  McMillan,  Mitchell,  Morrill,  Morton,  Oglesby,  Paddock, 
Patterson,  Sargent,  Spencer,  Wadleigh,  and  West — 28. 

Nays— Messrs.  Bogy,  Cockrell,  Cooper,  Davis,  Eaton,  Gordon,  Jones  (Fla.),  Kelly, 
Kernan,  Key,  McCreary,  McDonald,  Maxey,  Norwood,  Randolph,  and  Stevenson— IS. 

Messrs.  Barnum,  Withers,  Whyte,  Saulsbury,  Wallace,  Bayard,  and  Dennis,  who 
would  have  voted  against  it,  were  paired  with  Messrs.  Dawes,  Hamilton,  Hitchcock, 
Cameron  (Pa.),  Robertson,  Windom,  and  Wright,  who  would  have  voted  for  it ;  and 
Mr.  Ransom,  who  would  have  voted  against  it,  was  paired  with  Messrs.  Howe  and 
Ingalls,  who  would  have  voted  for  it,  he  having  two  of  the  affirmative  side  to  pair  with 
him  to  make  the  pair  even  where  a  two-thirds  vote  was  required. 


10 


* 

THE  DEMOCRATIC  PARTY. 

In  their  conventions  the  Democratic  party  always  ignore  the  school 
question.  They  dare  not  offend  their  Roman  Catholic  allies  by  passing 
resolutions  sustaining  the  public  schools,  and  it  would  be  equally  unwise 
for  them  to  openly  espouse  the  cause  of  the  Romanists;  therefore,  as  a 
'party  they  are  silent  on  the  subject  of  the  schools. 

The  platform  adopted  by  the  late  Democratic  National  Convention,  at 
St.  Louis,  has  only  an  immaterial  reference  to  the  school  question.  Not  a 
word  on  the  subject  was  spoken  by  any  of  their  orators.  The  Roman  Cath¬ 
olic  element  in  that  Convention  was  too  large  and  too  powerful  to  admit 
the  introduction  of  any  subject  distasteful  to  Romanists ;  but  there  was  an 
evident  desire  in  all  the  proceedings  of  the  Convention  to  gratify  them. 
A  Roman  Catholic  priest  was  invited  to  officiate  as  chaplain — the  New 
York  delegation  elected  a  Roman  Catholic  (Mr.  Kernan)  as  its  chairman, 
and  the  same  Roman  Catholic  nominated  Mr.  Tilden. 

In  his  letter  of  acceptance,  Governor  Tilden  makes  no  allusion  to  the 
educational  question,  thus  treating  the  subject  as  of  no  importance. 

It  requires  no  argument  to  prove  that  the  Roman  Catholics  of  the 
United  States  are  the  allies  of  the  Democratic  party ;  but  a  few  facts  in  this 
connection  may  be  interesting : 

Every  emphatic  demand  for  division  of  public  school  funds,  recogni¬ 
tion  of  parochial  schools,  or  abolition  of  the  system  of  secular  education, 
has  come  from  adherents  of  the  Democratic  party.  The  New  York  Staats 
Zeitung ,  the  most  widely  circulated  German  Democratic  paper  in  the  coun¬ 
try,  translated  and  copied  a  letter  pointing  out  evidences  of  Democratic 
hostility  to  the  school  system  at  the  West,  and  strongly  enforced  the  lesson 
by  its  editorial  comments.  The  Staats  Zeitung ,  of  Chicago,  and  the  Volhs- 
Matt,  of  Cincinnati,  though  still  supporting  the  Democratic  party,  speak 
very  strongly  of  its  tendencies  in  this  respect.  The  Westliche  Post ,  of  St. 

Louis,  constantly  assails  that  party  on  the  same  grounds. 

• 

With  remarkable  unanimity,  the  whole  Romish  press  urged  the  defeat 
of  President  Grant,  and  the  election  of  his  competitor.  Romish  priests, 
in  the  Catholic  Telegraph ,  sounded  the  praises  of  Mr.  Greeley,  declaimed 
with  bitter  denunciations  against  “the  four  years  of  misrule  ”  of  the  Repub¬ 
lican  administration,  and  joined  with  their  defense  of  Jesuitism  an  exhor¬ 
tation  to  all  their  followers  to  vote  with  the  opposition. 


11 


The  Freeman's  Journal  (R.  C.)  of  September  11,  1875,  in  an  editorial 
on  the  late  Ohio  election,  copies,  with  approbation,  the  following  from  the 

N.  Y.  Commercial  Advertiser  : 

“Without  the  Irish  Roman  Catholic  vote  in  Ohio,  in  New  York,  or  in  any  State  in 
the  Union,  there  would  not  be  enough  of  Democracy  left  for  seed.  For  fifty  years  and 
more  Irish  Roman  Catholics  have  given  victory  to  Democracy,  whenever  it  has 
achieved  victory.  They  have  been  hewers  of  wood  and  drawers  of  water  to  the  Demo¬ 
cratic  party  since  the  days  of  Jefferson  and  the  alien  and  seditious  laws.” 

The  Irish  Roman  Catholics  have  always  been  identified  with  the  Demo¬ 
cratic  party,  and  they  are  now  preparing  with  unusual  spirit  to  take  part  in 
the  present  Presidential  contest.  Their  purpose  is  open  and  avowed. 

Cardinal  McCloskey  says  :  “We  must  take  part  in  elections,”  the  in¬ 
terest  of  the  Church  demands  it,  for  the  success  of  the  Republican  party 
would  for  a  long  time  arrest  the  progress  of  Roman  Catholic  aggression, 
hence  they  will  move  in  solid  mass  in  every  State  against  the  party  pledged 
to  sustain  the  integrity  of  the  public  schools. 

The  vote  in  the  House  of  Representatives  on  Blaine’s  school  amend¬ 
ment  was  an  adroit  Democratic  movement,  intended  to  satisfy  the  people 
that  the  schools  were  in  no  danger,  and  that  the  Democratic  party  was 
friendly  to  them  ;  but  when  the  true  test  came,  as  it  did,  in  the  Senate, 
where  they  had  an  opportunity  of  so  amending  the  Constitution  as  to 
secure  the  safety  of  the  schools  for  a  long  period,  the  masks  were  thrown 
off,  exposing  the  coalition  between  Catholic  and  Democratic  Senators, 
and  thus  acting  together,  defeated  the  passage  of  the  amendment.  This 
first  national  victory  over  Protestantism  and  Republicanism  has  filled 
everv  Roman  Catholic  heart  with  rejoicing. 


THE  KEY-NOTE  OF  THE  CAMPAIGN  SOUNDED. 

The  Southern  Catholic ,  published  at  Memphis,  Tenn.,  issued  the  fol¬ 
lowing,  which  meets  a  friendly  response  from  the  entire  Romish  press : 

“There  are  two  very  essential  steps  to  be  taken  in  order  to  win  the  next  Presiden¬ 
tial  race.  It  is  scarcely  necessary,  we  trust,  to  urge  our  fellow-Catholics  to  assemble 
everywhere  around  the  Democratic  colors ;  for  they  are  all,  by  choice  or  necessity 
external  to  the  Republican  party,  and  it  is  incredible  to  believe  that  any  Catholic  who 
has  a  modicum  of  self-respect  and  love  for  his  church  can  co-operate  with  that  party. 
If  hitherto  he  has  done  so,  the  time  is  at  hand  to  abandon  an  organization  which  is 
confessedly,  and  without  longer  disguise,  at  war  with  our  holy  religion.” 

The  Catholic  Review ,  referring  to  the  action  of  the  Republican  Con¬ 
vention  at  Cincinnati,  says: 

“The  Republican  party  goes  out  of  its  way  to  insult  the  Catholics.” 


12 


9 


I 


The  (R.  C.)  Freeman's  Journal ,  of  Jane  24th,  says: 

“  The  plank  (relating  to  the  schools)  in  the  Republican  platform,  is  a  gratuitous 
insult." 

On  the  first  day  of  the  late  St.  Louis  Convention,  a  Methodist  clergy¬ 
man  was  invited  to  officiate  as  chaplain.  The  Boston  Pilot ,  the  organ  of  the 
New  England  Roman  Catholics,  coarsely  ridicules  the  prayer  of  the  clergy¬ 
man,  but  heartily  endorses  and  supports  the  nomination  of  Tildes  and 
Hendricks. 

A  New  York  Herald  correspondent,  writing  from  New  Lebanon, 
Columbia  County,  New  York,  under  date  of  August  17,  1876,  has  this 
paragraph : 

• 

“  Father  John  Joseph  Bsenxan,  who  is  the  principal  Roman  Catholic  clergyman 
in  this  latitude,  is  a  strong  advocate  for  Governor  Tilden.  He  assured  your  corres¬ 
pondent  that  all  his  people  would  vote  for  Tilden,  without  exception.  At  a  late  exhibi¬ 
tion  in  New  Lebanon,  gotten  up  for  the  benefit  of  a  Roman  Catholic  Seminary,  Father 
Bbennan  made  an  address,  in  which  he  spoke  kindly  of  Governor  Tilden.” 

From  the  Freeman's  Journal  of  September  11,  1875  : 

“  The  Black  Republican  party  in  most  regions  of  the  country,  have,  by  the  intol¬ 
erance  of  their  conduct,  forced  Catholics,  in  disregard  of  other  considerations,  to  take 
part  with  whatever  Democratic,  Liberal,  or  hybrid  party  has  opposed  the  Republicans.” 

The  same  paper,  in  speaking  of  the  Ohio  Democratic  nomination  of 
Allen  in  opposition  to  Hayes,  says : 

<:The  Democratic  State  Convention  of  Ohio  wisely  and  well  avoided  making  any 
such  (sectarian)  issue,  directly  or  indirectly.  It  contented  itself  with  a  political  plati¬ 
tude  about  religious  and  civil  liberty  for  everybody,  and  no  favors  to  be  shown  to  one 
religious  belief  rather  than  to  another.  The  Convention,  we  think,  did  well.  In  hon¬ 
orable  contrast  to  the  Methodistico-Calvinistico-Beecheristico-Free-Love-Radical-Re- 
publican  Convention,  it  hurled  no  insults  at  Catholics  ;  but  contented  itself  with  the 
reaffirmation  of  what  are,  most  undeniably,  the  traditional  tenets  of  the  best  and  most 
honorable  political  schools  of  the  past  of  the  United  States — the  principles  of  Washing¬ 
ton,  Jefierson,  Jackson ;  and,  since  then,  especially  of  the  Democratic  Party !  ” — 
Aug.  21,  1875. 

When  the  New  York  Democratic  party  nominated  Francis  Kernan 
for  Governor,  it  was  done  because  he  was,  as  the  Tribune  said  the  next  day, 

“  a  severe  and  earnest  Roman  Catholic.” 

f 

During  the  campaign,  Horatio  Seyjiour  made  a  speech  at  Oneida, 
N.  Y.,  which  was  reported  for  and  published  in  the  Utica  Observer.  From 
it  we  quote  the  following  paragraph: 


13 


“  In  looking  over  the  history  of  my  State,  I  find  that  we  have  never  had  a  Catholic 
Governor,  though  Catholics  constitute  about  one- third  of  the  population  and  a  very 
large  share  of  the  voters.  One  thing  I  cannot  bear  to  have  said.  They  have  been 
voting  for  Protestants  for  nearly  a  hundred  years,  and  I  cannot  bear  to  have  it  said 
that  Protestants  are  more  bigoted  than  Catholics,  and  cannot  vote  once  for  a  Catholic 
m  return.  [Great  applause.]  Every  public  man  in  the  State  has  asked  Catholics  for 
their  votes.  I  ask  them  if  they  oannot  reciprocate  the  favor  by  votiug  for  an  honest 
Roman  Catholic  ?  ” 

In  this  contest,  Mr.  Kernan  and  the  Democracy  were  badly  beaten, 
the  Catholics  not  being  quite  strong  enough ;  but  now,  they  believe,  they 
have  a  controlling  power,  and  they  intend  to  exert  it.  Here  is  what  the 
Catholic  Review  says  on  that  subject: 

“  Our  country  contains  a  large  number  of  Catholics.  They  increase  year  by  year, 
and  it  seems  to  be  merely  a  question  of  time,  and  that  not  very  remote,  when  their 
numbers  will  preponderate  over  all  religious  faiths.  *  *  * 

“  We  make  this  assertion,  that  at  any  moment  the  Catholics  of  the  United  States 
move  as  a  body,  they  can  decide  any  election.  We  know  that  they  cannot,  nor  do  they 
desire  to  form  a  distinct  political  party,  but  they  can  make  any  such  party  triumphant, 
or  insure  its  defeat.” 


THE  ROMAN  CATHOLICS  CONTROLLING  THE  DEMO¬ 
CRATIC  PARTY  IN  OHIO. 

A  Mr.  Giiegan,  an  Irish  Roman  Catholic,  was  a  member  of  the  Ohio 
Legislature  in  1874,  and  was  the  author  of  a  Bill  giving  the  Catholic  clergy 
certain  privileges  in  the  penal  institutions  of  the  State.  There  was  a  strong 
opposition  to  the  passage  of  the  Bill,  and  fearing  that  it  would  be  defeated, 
the  organ  of  the  friends  of  the  Bill  published  the  following  : 

“  The  political  party  with  which  nine-tenths  of  the  Catholics  affiliate  on  account 
of  past  services  that  they  will  never  forget,  now  controls  the  State.  Withdraw  the 
support  which  Catholics  have  given  to  it,  and  it  will  fail  in  this  City,  and  County,  and 
State,  as  speedily  as  it  has  risen  to  its  long-lost  position  and  power.  Mr.  Ghegan’s  Bill 
will  test  the  sincerity  of  its  professions.” 

That  threat  was  effectual.  The  Bill  was  passed,  and  then  the  same 
Roman  Catholic  organ  said  : 

“The  unbroken  solid  vote , of  the  Catholic  citizens  of  Ohio  will  be  given  to  the 
Democrats  at  the  Fall  elections.” 

They  were  so  given,  but  Rutherford  B.  Hayes  was  elected  notwith¬ 
standing. 


14 


ARCHBISHOP  PURCELL’S  ADDRESS. 

# 

Immediately  after  the  passage  of  the  school  amendment  to  the  consti¬ 
tution,  by  the  almost  unanimous  vote  of  the  House  of  Representatives, 
Archbishop  Purcell,  of  Cincinnati,  issued  an  address  to  the  people  of  the 
United  States,  the  evident  purpose  of  which  was  to  create  the  impression 
that  the  Catholics  were  not  opposed  to  the  public  schools,  and  that  the 
school  question  should  be  withdrawn  from  political  discussion. 

It  was  clearly  the  opinion  of  the  Archbishop  that  his  “Declaration” 
would  be  sufficient  to  arrest  the  further  agitation  of  the  subject,  but  it  is 
now  apparent  that  he  spoke  only  for  himself. 

This  reply  to  the  Archbishop’s  extraordinary  “Declaration”  was  given 
by  the  Freeman' s  Journal ,  (August  26th),  the  leading  Roman  Catholic  paper 
of  New  York.  Doubtless  it  speaks  the  sentiments  of  the  Roman  Catholic 
party  of  the  entire  country.  Here  it  is : 

“  The  Archbishop  of  Cincinnati,  in  his  letter  lately  published,  makes  known  nothing 
more  than  his  own  views  and  sentiments.  It  was  a  perfectly  good  retort  of  a  Black- 
Republican  in  one  of  the  houses  of  Congress,  that  ‘  Archbishop  Purcell  is  not  the 
Pope.’  The  Senator  might  have  gone  farther,  and  said  that  Archbishop  Purcell’s  letter 
represented  nothing ,  except  the  personal  notions,  on  the  day  he  uttered  them,  of  this 
good  and  zealous  old  missionary  archbishop.  This  letter  does  not  represent  his 
notions,  as  set  forth  in  his  organ,  less  than  two  years  ago.  *  *  * 

“Archbishop  Purcell's  letter  is  the  mere  expression  of  the  opinion  of  an  excellent 
old  ecclesiastic,  who  has  already  passed  the  age  of  active  and  effective  judgment  on 
the  merits  of  questions  as  they  rise.  His  expression  of  his  views  binds  no  bishop, 

I 

and  no  priest.  He  is  one  of  about  a  dozen  archbishops,  and  of  some  fifty  or  more 
bishops,  of  the  United  States.  These  have  not  been  gathered  in  any  Canonical  Coun¬ 
cil,  and,  if  they  had  been,  their  doings  would  need  the  approval  of  the  Yicar  of  Christ, 
to  make  them  binding  on  the  faithful.  But,  outside  of  all  regular  order,  the  personal 
opinion  of  the  venerable  Archbishop  Purcell,  as  to  what  the  Catholic  Church  and  its 
hierarchy  will  do,  or  “waive”  doing,  is  that  of  an  aged,  respectable,  respected,  but 
utterly  inopportune,  gentleman. 

“The  manner  in  which  the  well-intended  letter  of  the  aged  archbishop  has  been 
attacked,  makes  it  a  kindness  to  excuse  it.  It  cannot  be  defended.” 


THE  COERCIVE  POLICY. 

Hitherto,  the  success  of  parties  was  simply  the  triumph  of  a  civil  policy, 
without  any  religious  significance  whatever.  Political  parties  were  combi¬ 
nations  of  citizens  of  all  churches  and  every  faith,  banded  together  to  con- 


;ol  the  Government,  not  in  the  interest  of  church  and  creed,  but  for  the 
good  of  the  whole  people.  Nominations  were  not  based  upon  the  religious 
opinions  of  the  candidate,  but  upon  the  general  fitness  of  the  man  to  fill  the 
office.  The  test  of  fitness  was  not  his  devotion  to  the  Catholic,  or  the 
Presbyterian,  or  the  Methodist  church,  but  his  fidelity  as  a  man  and  his 
loyalty  as  a  citizen.  To  this  liberal  spirit,  growing  out  of  the  complete 
separation  of  Church  and  State,  we  are  indebted  for  that  peace  and 
prosperity  which  have  been  enjoyed  by  each  religious  denomination  and 
every  citizen  in  the  land. 

Our  Catholic  clergy  have  a  perfect  right  to  labor  and  vote  for  the  Demo¬ 
cratic  party,  but  they  have  no  right  to  use  the  discipline  of  their  church  to 
force  those  who  believe  in  their  faith,  but  not  in  their  politics,  to  unite  with 
them  at  the  ballot-box. 

Yet  the  coercive  policy  is  the  one  now  adopted.  The  discipline  of  the 
Church  is  to  be  brought  to  bear  upon  its  followers,  and  the  Romish  Church, 
inspired  by  Jesuitical  teachings,  is  to  make  common  cause  with  Democracy 
in  its  endeavor  to  overthrow  the  Republican  party,  and  with  it  the  free 
school  system  which  it  sustains. 

The  legislation  of  Ohio  and  New  York,  especially  their  city  legislation, 
affords  strong  proof  of  the  design  of  the  Papal  hierarchy  to  use  the  Dem¬ 
ocratic  party  as  the  political  lever  to  overthrow  the  free  school  system  of 
the  land.  This  accomplished,  the  door  is  open  for  the  control  of  other  in¬ 
stitutions  in  the  future,  and,  through  a  national  triumph  of  the  party  to 
which  the  church  is  allied,  to  a  radical  change  of  our  form  of  Government. 

These  possibilities  should  arouse  intelligent  citizens  of  all  creeds, 
whether  of  native  or  foreign  birth,  to  the  danger  that  threatens  our  coun¬ 
try  if  the  Roman  Catholic  element,  through  the  success  of  Democracy, 
should  obtain  control  of  our  national  affairs.  If  knowledge  of  what  has 
been  done  in  Germany  through  priestism  will  awaken  our  people  to  the 
designs  of  the  same  power  in  the  United  States,  the  firm  stand  of  Bismarck 
was  not  taken  an  hour  too  soon.  That  it  may  attract  the  attention  of  every 
American  citizen,  and  cause  him  to  labor  with  greater  fidelity  for  the  party 
that  is  pledged  to  the  maintenance  of  civil  and  religious  liberty,  the  support 
of  the  free  schools,  and  the  perfect  equality  of  all  men  before  the  law,  is 
the  prayer  of  millions  in  Europe  and  America,  who  look  upon  our  free  gov¬ 
ernment  as  the  young  giant  that  is  yet  to  break  the  fetters  of  the  world’s 
oppressed. 


